Chilly

I'm worried about people judging me? Juxtaposition time:

Totally, completely, and utterly missed the point of that juxtaposition. I suggest reading John Adams' or SnR's posts for help.

I love these posts that are complete sarcasm and have no argument. Lets play the "juxtapose pBills quotes" game. We'll limit it to posts from July. First, lets juxtapose that post (and the past few posts) with: Part 2: Part 3: Part 4: Part 5: ^^Reached the number of allowed quoted blocks of text, so the next part will have to be without it: Part 6: pBills: I vote for the Candidate who I like, who I think is best. Of course they may win, they may lose. pBills: I will use my vote wisely and vote for the one that has no chance of winning and that will fade into nothing (until the next election) instead of the candidate that may deal with the issues that I care about during their term as President.

Too bad it won't help you understand it.

lol, I too read that this morning. <3 Beer

"In a way, the world-view of the Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything, and what they swallowed did them no harm, because it left no residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird."

Eh, its pointless to argue with him, but its entertaining.

Let me spell it out for you: If either Obama or McCain get elected, America's !@#$ed. You even said it yourself that a huge problem is the excessive spending in Government today - and neither one are promising to fix it. Neither one are going to do anything for the American people. Voting for either one of those two douchebags is throwing your vote away. Voting for the 3rd party candidate at least rejects the political agenda that they both have. It does way more than voting for the old guard.

Are you referring to Obama or McCain here? I can't tell.

Thanks for folding spineless Dems!

You didn't (and still haven't) said much of anything.

Right, because a 3rd party can just flip on a switch if they had a good candidate and immediately become a national player. I forgot about that law, sorry.

You are like talking to a complete and utter brick wall. !@#$ campaigns, they have nothing to do with this. Its about eventually causing change in the parties and candidates. Do you even understand how the hell campaigns become eligible for federal funding?

Actually, yes you did. The idea is, first and foremost, to shake up the two major parties. If anyone is unhappy about the direction of this country - and it has been complicity done from both sides of the aisle - the very first thing one should want to do is shake up the parties. Make them afraid of the people, that some are starting to realize you can vote a different way. !@#$ what the general public notices, its about what the politicians notice. The way to make someone change is to take a chunk of something away from them that they need. The big problem with our system is that it has devolved to the point that the electorate needs to be the ultimate check of power, something which hasn't happened before. The easiest way to do this is to take votes away from the two major parties, and give them to a third party. One of two things will ultimately happen: 1.) (Most likely) - Both parties shift and reform a bit, fighting for those votes, as they make a difference in close elections. 2.) (Less likely) - A third party becomes a legitimate threat, causing a realignment in political parties to bring it back down to two. There is no "philosophy" involved here. The Democrats and Republicans will do what they feel best wins them elections. Identifying with one party and voting for the "lesser of two evils" is an action which enables their actions to continue without consequences.

Not surprised that you completely missed the point of voting for someone to cause a party to reach the 5% threshold.

Love that change. Great job sticking to your principles Obama. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll...&vote=00168

They collected cow farts in a pink plastic rocket 50 years ago?

Maybe not, but his sacrifice will make the best dutch oven EVER

i r collector

fark it, I'm done with the Bills after that miserable performance

The problem with Nader is he's not running under a 3rd party ticket, so no one will be getting funds even if he breaks the 5% mark. Anything to shake up the current candidates and get them focused on being something other than election machines would be great, though.

Its a bit more complex than that - Barr won't actually get elected, so I'm much more comfortable voting for him, even with his negative sides. If he was the Republican nominee right now, I'd likely be looking for a 3rd party candidate as well. The point isn't to elect Barr.

I'm likely going to hold my nose and vote for Barr. Not a huge fan of his lack of foresight or what I consider dishonesty, but his policy platform is the closest out of everyone that I'm looking for - and by doing so, I'll be helping the most popular 3rd party try to reach the 5% plateau to receive federal funds.

It makes me laugh when people essentially say, like pBills did, "I'm so worried about the deficit, due to ridiculous spending, I'm going to vote for one of these guys:" Barack Obama John McCain Yet the same idiots who say they are worried about the deficit are still going to vote for them, because they're the only "viable" options.

Says the guy supporting Barack Obama. Irony at its finest.